When the Syrian revolution broke out, its initial demands were to overthrow the Assad family regime, which ruled the country with an iron fist and turned it into a family enterprise. These demands represented a popular desire to break free from the mentality of the one-party system and totalitarian thought, which led to tyranny and dictatorship and repressed dissenting voices. 

However, the period following the fall of the regime revealed new challenges to building a new Syria, as voices emerged seeking to return to chauvinistic and racist models of governance that led to the suppression of Syria's rich diversity.

Everyone knows that Syria is characterized by its mosaic diversity, comprising various ethnicities and sects, including Arabs, Kurds, Assyrians, Druze, Alawites, Christians, and others. Yet, the Ba'ath regime entrenched the idea over many years that Syria is exclusively Arab, marginalizing minorities and excluding their rights. Repressive policies aimed to obliterate the identities of these components, especially the Kurds, by preventing them from learning their mother tongue and depriving them of fundamental rights such as nationality and property.

Historically, the Kurdish people lived in Syria under difficult conditions of marginalization and exclusion and were the most subjected to the policies of the Ba'ath regime, which used the party as a tool to instill chauvinism in the minds of Syrian Arabs. As a result, Kurds suffered discrimination in all aspects of life, from education to employment, in addition to policies aimed at changing the demographic composition of their regions through projects like the Arab Belt, which involved settling Arab populations in Kurdish areas to erase Kurdish identity.

In light of all this, the Kurdish uprising in 2004 demonstrated how these repressive policies were a major catalyst for the emergence of the political Kurdish movement, which demanded recognition of Kurdish cultural and political rights and the right to citizenship. Despite the brutal repression faced by Kurds during this uprising, it succeeded in shedding light on their suffering and raising awareness among other components of the Syrian people about their plight.

With the onset of the Syrian revolution in 2011, a new opportunity arose for all components of the Syrian people to demand their rights and rebuild Syria on the foundations of justice and freedom. The initial popular movement expressed the aspirations of all Syrians for a democratic state that respects pluralism and guarantees individual rights. As events escalated, the revolution became an opportunity for Kurds and other minorities to demand their legitimate rights that had been marginalized for decades.

However, after the regime's downfall, it became essential to search for a governance system that guarantees representation for all and prevents a return to oppressive practices. In this context, the idea of federalism emerged as an option that ensures coexistence among all Syrian components, allowing each group to manage its internal affairs while maintaining the unity of the state. This model is considered optimal for countries with ethnic and sectarian diversity, as it balances between the center and the regions and distributes power in a way that ensures everyone’s effective participation.

Despite this balanced and appropriate model of federalism in line with Syrian diversity, the concept faces rejection from some segments of Syrian society, where federalism is associated with division and separation. This misconception is a result of a political culture entrenched by authoritarian regimes in the Middle East. However, federalism, in its essence, means unity and cohesion; it is a modern political system that achieves a balance between respecting local particularities and maintaining the unity of the state.

In Syria, a federal system can ensure the rights of all components and dissolve the wall of hatred and animosity built by the previous regime. Federalism also allows each component to manage its local resources and develop its community, while preserving national sovereignty on major issues such as defense and foreign policy.

Therefore, achieving federalism in Syria requires practical steps starting with raising awareness about the concept of federalism and its benefits. Political elites and intellectuals must work to change negative perceptions about federalism through comprehensive national dialogues that bring together all segments of Syrian society. Additionally, federalism should be included as a constitutional option in discussions about Syria's future, ensuring fair representation for all components in managing the affairs of the country.

Alongside adopting a federal system, Syria needs to achieve transitional justice to overcome decades of oppression and injustice. This requires acknowledging the grievances suffered by minorities, particularly the Kurdish people, and compensating them for the violations they endured. Serious steps must also be taken to change the political culture instilled by the Ba'ath regime, which was based on chauvinism and discrimination.

Transitional justice includes holding accountable those responsible for the crimes and violations committed against the Syrian people across all its segments and working towards building strong national institutions based on the principle of citizenship and respect for human rights. There should also be steps to reform the educational and media systems to spread values of tolerance and coexistence among community components.

Thus, to convince Syrian society of the viability of federalism, one can draw on successful international experiences that adopted this model and achieved.

Ezzeddin Malla